Grammar schools to be means tested for free places

No they are state schools

What I would prefer to see is all schools, certainly in grammar LAs, running 11 plus clubs for those who would benefit. This would clearly level the playing field. State schools in Bucks cannot “tutor” so parents pay. Others get their tutoring in private schools. Fsm dc can get in with a lower score but the just about managing families really lose out. Level the playing field and run after school tutoring.

Because we live in a country where all education is free if you want it! As I’ve already said! That’s the welfare state.
Means testing education is morally repugnant!

It’s not just about schools either is it. Lots of things give ‘others an upper hand’ As mentioned above how can anyone ‘police’ parents helping their kids.

Look at kids clubs.
Football, tennis, or music and language lessons. You need to pay for these and hence give your kids an upper hand.

As a society how can we stop parents supporting their kids because some parents can’t afford it, work nights or weekends, or don’t have the education level. How do we do this short of removing all kids from their parents at birth and putting them into a state run home. We can’t.

If the Government want to remove all Grammars or private schools because of inequality then they will also have to

1. level up or down all schools as equal. Why should some kids get outstanding schools and other good or needs improvement.
2. monitor all home support and stop parents supporting their kids.
3. get rid of all forms of clubs and out of school learning ( dance, music, drama, art, first aid, sports etc )

Good luck with all that.

@nearlylovemyusername that's my point.....
the test should be done with no preparation or practice.

Conservative Central Office not at its best today....

@BrownTroutBluesAgain

Education is free, but as this thread highlights

1. grammar schools provide better education and then life opportunities than comps (at average)
2. grammars disproportionally benefit those better off, presumably because of their ability to buy homes within catchment and tutor their kids

Our society is aiming for equality so why to leave this loophole for the rich who escape private school fees and VAT?

I’m afraid you’re living in cloud coocoo land if you think anyone has the ability to monitor home support.
You can’t stop parents helping their kids and you can’t make parents help them either.

Education is available to all in this country for free, ie no fees. Just like we have a free nhs.

These services will not be means tested as they stand at the core of our welfare system.
So too, however, does freedom of choice. If someone wants to pay then fine. If someone doesn’t then fine.

Angela Rayner is an idiot and Labour will never be able to get rid of private schools. In order to do that they would need to change the law to have the ability to shut down at will all businesses and charities and take property and hundreds of years old financial supports, all tied up legally, given to the schools. They would have to revoke thousands of age old wills and ongoing donations. They will have to fight not just individual schools but estates, Religious Institutes including the Church of England. They declared a while back they would remove charitable status only to be told they simply can’t do that legally.

Education is free if you want it and everyone in this country has the right to use it.

But those intelligent educated parents can buy their DC books and do prep with them - how is this fair to bright DCs of thick /uneducated parents or those hardworking ones who don't have skills or time and can't prep their kids?

No. You just started a thread giving the false impression that this is going to happen, when in fact it is not.

I’m guessing this is sarcasm

@nearlylovemyusername er no...... it's nothing to do with having intelligent parents or not. It's to do with having £££ to pay for a tutor from Year 4 going over and over practice tests so the child can do them in their sleep vs a child that will see the test for the first time on the day of the test.
Either every child who takes the test is provided with a practice book/worksheet package (same package for everyone) or no practice should be done at all and the children go in blind.

Yes all siblings have to do the 11plus the same as everyone else.
There is no entry to grammar without grades that fall within the accepted level.

If there’s a place at the lower accepted level and a ‘draw’ priority in some schools will be given to siblings. You can also contest the decision if a sibling doesn’t get in but still gets good grades. Keeping family together is important.

I had a friend that did this and got her second and third child into a grammar that her eldest was at even though it wasn’t their nearest grammar.

Yes yes to this as well!

All those who have educated intelligent parents should be removed from said parents.
There must be equality for all

I hope so. We should either have a grammar system in all areas or none at all.

It's just dominated by affluent parents who can afford the private prep or tutoring.

All or nothing.

The truest way to be fair for all children sitting the 11+ for grammar schools would be to make it illegal to tutor before the exam.
I'm not exactly sure how that could be monitored though 😂

(Is "truest" a word 🤔)

But those who go to indies will pay VAT.
So no escape really - if parents do well they should pay for their kids to be educated, right?

What aspiration? Keir defined their "hard working audience" very clearly - those who depend on public services and can't pay cheque if they fall on hard times. The rest are fair game

Why not?

Sounds like great idea - why some wealthier kids should get better education than the others?

Labour are so keen to get rid of privates (yes they start with VAT, but Rayner was clear she wants to abolish them), so why to allow those wealthier kids to get backdoor access to quality education in grammars?

I live in a grammar school area and there has been no mention of this by friends with school age children or in the local press.

Quite a few grammar schools give sibling priority. The siblings still have to do the 11+. If they don't get a high enough mark they won't get in. However, if they do get a high enough mark they may get priority. The form this takes varies. For some grammars, siblings will be admitted ahead of non-siblings with higher scores. In others, sibling priority only comes into play if a tie-breaker is needed to separate candidates with the same score.

Do many grammar schools have a sibling rule? How does this work? Do siblings had to do 11+? Or do they just get a place?

No, wouldn’t have thought so. It would undermine everyone’s plight to work hard to do well in life. If they means tested, they wouldn’t get the overseas income (for boarders - as some grammars have boarding) and they’d alienate a lot of their local catchment, who, if they didn’t pass the means test (as in, have the disposable income) would just seek an independent alternative. Merit based is the only way.

How do you means test Granny, anyway? We pay our way, but a lot of parents I know have grandparents that pay the fees. So, the circle keeps turning.

Of course you need to check the specific criteria of any school you are thinking of. It is no secret, it will be on the council website.

My local grammar allocates up to a quarter of places for kids who get pupil premium. The exam has a pass mark and if you don’t hit that you aren’t eligible. But if you don’t get PP then places are allocated (within a catchment area) on scores. So you can get in quite a bit lower down the list of scores if you get PP.

I’d like to think this was about social mobility but frankly I think they are keen on the extra funds it brings in.

And there are no circumstances in which a state school can charge fees for day pupils. There are, however, a few state boarding schools that can charge a fee for boarding pupils.

Independent schools can, of course, do whatever they want.